Re: Yuri manga and ALC Publishing) makes Publisher's Week
- --- In Yuricon@yahoogroups.com, Johann Chua <johannchua@h...> wrote:
> "Shoujo ai" always seemed to me as being too much trouble to type,so i
> stuck with yuri. ^_^Not to mention the irritating and seemingly endless variations of
>It always amazes me that this myth still exists, but then ignorance
> I keep running across "there's no such thing as porn for women".
still exists, so...
> Lea Hernandez had this story about CLOCKWORK ANGELS (one of _the_ bestThere's definitely a sense in American publishing that words are safe,
> American yuri comics) being rejected for review by _Romantic Times_ on
> the basis that it was pornography rather than erotica. Porn being
> visual, while erotica is written. Never mind what sex scenes in romance
> novels can be like; I guess they think the flowery language lessens the
while pictures are not. Perhaps because a child can pick up a book
with explicit sexual scene written and not immediately comprehend,
while the same scene in pictures is somewhat more obvious.
>Basically there are some folks who, despite all evidence to the
> Some folks on the Shoujo ML a few years back thought that yuri was
> hentai (i.e., porn for guys), therefore f/f in shoujo manga and josei
> comics wasn't yuri. They also protested the use of yaoi to mean any
> anime/manga m/m (yaoi is never hentai!), though that could be because I
> cited two Hiroyuki Utatane H manga stories.
contrary, believe that what women read is romance, period. Even when
that romance included explicity sex - because it's for women, it can't
be porn. That sort of circular logic makes no sense to me, but I am
not one of those people. :-)
I maintain my definition of porn v. erotica - erotica is when the
participants/characters are focused on themselves and/or each other.
Porn is when the participants/characters are implicitly or explicitly
aware of an observing third party. I don't insist that anyone else use
my definition, but it works for me.